Via Jerome at MyDD:

Here's the state of the race that includes all 50 states (TL adds: in other words, with Florida and Michigan counting):

Clinton leads Obama, 1127 to 1119, in pledged delegates.

Clinton leads Obama, 240 to 140, in super-delegates.

There are 393 remaining super-delegates.

There are 1301 remaining pledged delegates.

There are another 94 remaining delegates among the uncommitted, and John Edwards delegates.

Sources: Jerome says Green Papers and DemConWatch have the best and most accurate information.

I disagree with Big Tent Democrat, Markos and every other Obama supporter on what to do about Florida. (I'm saving Michigan for another post as it's factually different.)

I don't believe that Obama suffered because of the lack of campaigning allowed in Florida. And, if he did, so did Hillary. They had television. Floridians could watch the debates and the nightly news and read the newspapers. They weren't living in a cave.

It's evident from the high turnout in the Florida primary -- 1.7 million Democrats voted in a primary that was not open to Independents-- that Floridian Democrats came out in record numbers. They voted early, voted absentee and voted on their primary day. In all, 4 million voters voted on Jan. 29, 41% of all registered voters. That's a huge percentage for a primary.

Florida Dems didn't willingly hold their primary early, the Republican legislature forced the early date on them. [More...]

By Big Tent Democrat

While I think it is pretty clear that the DNC did not follow its rules regarding Florida and Michigan, I think Obama supporters make a compelling argument: why didn't Clinton fight for Florida in 2007? It does require a response.

I think the short answer is the DNC used the leverage of possible backlash in Iowa and NH to get the candidates to go along with its wrongheaded and harmful actions. Given the strength Clinton had and I believe would have in a revote in Florida, it seems they miscalculated. Clinton should have fought for Florida at least, since the Florida date change was forced by a Republican controlled legislature (see Rule 21 of the DNC Delegate Selection rules which seem to provide Florida a safe harbor to protect its delegates.)

That said, that still does not address the Obama argument that he did not get to compete for the votes in Florida and Michigan by campaigning in Florida and Michigan. A very fair point. But what are we to do? I go back to my original solution:

By Big Tent Democrat

Like Move On, Speaker Pelosi's daughter, Christine Pelosi, seems not to care who wins the most votes in this nomination process:

"Many of us are elected by the grassroots of the party," she said, "And I cannot imagine going home in November to those people and try to phone bank for someone who did not capture the [pledged delegate] vote... We were all galvanized by what happened to Al Gore in Florida."

Apparently Ms. Pelosi does not at ALL remember what happened to Al Gore, he won the POPULAR VOTE, and lost the vote of the "delegates" to the Electoral College. Ms. Pelosi has it exactly backwards. I for one would be dismayed if the Popular Vote winner were denied the nomination due to the undemocratic pledged delegate process - with its undemocratic caucus and apportionment processes. That would be a travesty.

By Big Tent Democrat

This horse has long been beaten to death, but this thoughtful diary about the MI/FL fiasco ignores the fact that, as commenter dhonig points out, it was the DNC that changed the rules of what the punishment would be for moving up the Mi and FL primaries. Rule 20(c)(1) of the DNC Rules on Selection of Delegates at the time the date changes were enacted by Michigan and Florida stated:

By Big Tent Democrat

As we say in Spanish, una muerte anunciada:

Sen. Barack Obama won the support Friday of the 1.9-million member Service Employees International Union, his second endorsement in as many days from large labor organizations . . . "There has never been a fight in Illinois or a fight in the nation where our members have not asked Barack Obama for assistance and he has not done everything he could to help us," Andy Stern, the union's president, told reporters in announcing the decision.

By Big Tent Democrat

Research 2000 says it is 47-42:

ALL MEN WOMEN

Barack Obama 47% 53% 42%

Hillary Clinton 42% 36% 47%

Undecided 11% 11% 11%

The Center for International Policy, a group whose mission is "promoting a U.S. foreign policy based on international cooperation, demilitarization and respect for basic human rights," has released two reports in the past month comparing the positions of the Republican and Democratic candidates on immigration, using their own words, statements on their websites and their votes in Congress. On the Republican side, McCain and Huckabee are included; for the Democrats, it's Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards.

The presidential candidates of the Democratic Party share a common conviction that the country badly needs comprehensive immigration reform that offers a path to legalization for the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States. The policy positions of the Democratic Party candidates—Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, and Barack Obama—stand in sharp contrast to those offered by the Republican Party candidates, with the partial exception of John McCain.

[More...]

By Big Tent Democrat

So sayeth Rassmussen:

The latest Rasmussen Reports polling in Texas also shows the former First Lady on top in the Lone Star State. Clinton attracts 54% of the vote in Texas while Obama earns 38% with nearly three weeks to go until Election Day.

h/t andgarden. Polling shows Clinton with large leads in Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania. This ain't over.

By Big Tent Democrat

Markos writes another post attacking the Clinton campaign, nothing new there, but I found this part deeply ironic:

So the Clinton campaign has graduated from saying that certain states don't matter, to saying certain voters don't matter, to now saying that the Democratic Party electorate doesn't matter.

I am curious if Markos would agree with me that the popular vote totals should be the most important criteria for super delegates? Do you think he would agree that ALL voters matter (including the voters of Florida and Michigan, the ones Howard Dean and Donna Brazile decided don't matter?) Or do you think he will follow the Obama mantra that only the pledged delegate count matters?

By Big Tent Democrat

This will undoubtedly be a very controversial post. But I always speak my mind. And I am speaking for me only here.

Jeralyn highlighted in a previous post that the great John Lewis is switching his endorsement from Clinton to Obama. Not surprising in that Obama has had great momentum. Easily justifiable for Lewis in that his district voted overwhelmingly for Obama and he is indeed a fine candidate. But the reasons given for switching are not helpful. Indeed, in my view, they are divisive:

More...

Via Corrente Wire:: Symantec warns of virus in Hillary spam posing as video link.

The Hillary Clinton election campaign is being exploited in a spam message that tries to trick users into downloading a Trojan to their desktops by pretending to offer a link to a video of a Hillary Clinton campaign speech. "It's the first time we've seen spam like this targeting Hillary Clinton," says Doug Bowers, Symantec's senior director of anti-abuse engineering, who says the spam message, still not seen in large volumes, was first spotted today.

The spam, which has the subject line "Hillary Clinton Video!!" offers users a link promising a video of the presidential candidate giving a speech. In reality, clicking on it would cause a Trojan to be downloaded to compromise the victim's machine for the purpose of sending more spam.

Symantec says the only other candidate being abused this way is Ron Paul.